Wednesday 25th March 2015

[citizenJA]

Also - excellent article at labourlist.org by Sunny Hundal on austerity and lies - well worth a look.

Right - Matthew will be here shortly - time to put the lippy on and make some decent coffee.....

A good cup of coffee sounds brilliant.

[Spacedone]

As is already being pointed out by some:

Labour's plans don't actually require a rise in NI - but the Tory plans, if a VAT rise is ruled out, means either a significant tax hike elsewhere or even deeper cuts.

As usual, short term tactical lobby-wowing "brilliance" from Dave starts to unravel before the day is even out.

The PMQ lunchtime shift over at the Guardian were punching the air like Cameron had just scored the winner in the FA Cup rather than gotten a headline for a day whilst simultaneously hamstringing his own party's deficit reduction policy by ostensibly removing the one thing that could potentially mitigate it to something other than total fantasy.

Now they've got to go through the election campaign pretending they meant it when they said their plan comes entirely from cuts and none of the economists who looked at it after the Budget thought that was credible in the slightest.

If they'd intended to rule out VAT they'd have done it in the Budget when they had total media coverage for days, not in PMQs on a Wednesday. This is Dave's surprise (to his own ministers) announcement of just 4 energy tariffs all over again.

[pk1]

As is already being pointed out by some:

Labour's plans don't actually require a rise in NI - but the Tory plans, if a VAT rise is ruled out, means either a significant tax hike elsewhere or even deeper cuts.

As usual, short term tactical lobby-wowing "brilliance" from Dave starts to unravel before the day is even out.

The PMQ lunchtime shift over at the Guardian were punching the air like Cameron had just scored the winner in the FA Cup rather than gotten a headline for a day whilst simultaneously hamstringing his own party's deficit reduction policy by ostensibly removing the one thing that could potentially mitigate it to something other than total fantasy.

Now they've got to go through the election campaign pretending they meant it when they said their plan comes entirely from cuts and none of the economists who looked at it after the Budget thought that was credible in the slightest.

If they'd intended to rule out VAT they'd have done it in the Budget when they had total media coverage for days, not in PMQs on a Wednesday. This is Dave's surprise (to his own ministers) announcement of just 4 energy tariffs all over again.

BBC quote Matthew Handjob saying:

Pushed on whether the Conservatives will explicitly rule out a rise in National Insurance contributions, he said: "We've been cutting National Insurance. We're very clear, we've been cutting it... the direction from us is clear." He says you don't cut it in one parliament and raise it in the next.

Mr Hancock also says his party knows where it is going to make the savings it needs to make - £12bn from welfare, £5bn from tackling tax avoidance and the rest in savings from government departments.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-32041435" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

NICs been cut since 2010 ? Really ??

I wouldn't sign an affidavit that they hadn't cut NICs but I very much doubt he was telling the truth.

[yahyah]

Has there been any good news while I've been gardening ?

I'm fed up because the car's been at the garage since Friday.
We're getting the estimate tomorrow to fix a head gasket problem and I wanted to give a hefty donation to Labour but the garage bill will be even more hefty so will have to think again. Damn.

[ohsocynical]

bill ‏@kingbill73 21h21 hours ago Hessle, England

Apparently there is no truth in the rumour that Grant Shapps can blow up a polygraph machine simply by being in the same room as one.

[ohsocynical]

As is already being pointed out by some:

Labour's plans don't actually require a rise in NI - but the Tory plans, if a VAT rise is ruled out, means either a significant tax hike elsewhere or even deeper cuts.

As usual, short term tactical lobby-wowing "brilliance" from Dave starts to unravel before the day is even out.

The PMQ lunchtime shift over at the Guardian were punching the air like Cameron had just scored the winner in the FA Cup rather than gotten a headline for a day whilst simultaneously hamstringing his own party's deficit reduction policy by ostensibly removing the one thing that could potentially mitigate it to something other than total fantasy.

Now they've got to go through the election campaign pretending they meant it when they said their plan comes entirely from cuts and none of the economists who looked at it after the Budget thought that was credible in the slightest.

If they'd intended to rule out VAT they'd have done it in the Budget when they had total media coverage for days, not in PMQs on a Wednesday. This is Dave's surprise (to his own ministers) announcement of just 4 energy tariffs all over again.

BBC quote Matthew Handjob saying:

Pushed on whether the Conservatives will explicitly rule out a rise in National Insurance contributions, he said: "We've been cutting National Insurance. We're very clear, we've been cutting it... the direction from us is clear." He says you don't cut it in one parliament and raise it in the next.

Mr Hancock also says his party knows where it is going to make the savings it needs to make - £12bn from welfare, £5bn from tackling tax avoidance and the rest in savings from government departments.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-32041435" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

NICs been cut since 2010 ? Really ??

I wouldn't sign an affidavit that they hadn't cut NICs but I very much doubt he was telling the truth.

Would that be the under 20 somethings who aren't going to pay a stamp in future?

[frightful_oik]

From Wiki:

2003 - 2011 the contribution was at 0.00% on the lower band of earnings and then at 11.00% up to the upper limit and 1% on earnings over the upper limit.

2011 - 2015 the contribution was at 0.00% on the lower band of earnings and then at 12.00% up to the upper limit and 2% on earnings over the upper limit.
The upper limit is currently set at the figure at which the higher rate of Income Tax becomes chargeable for a person on the standard personal allowance for Income Tax. In the early 2000s the lower threshold for employee contributions was aligned with the standard personal allowance for Income Tax but has since diverged significantly, as illustrated in the following table.
Year NI Employee Threshold Income Tax Allowance Charge to NI only
2007-8 £5,205 £5,225 £20
2008-9 £5,465 £6,435 £970
2009-10 £5,725 £6,475 £750
2010-11 £5,725 £6,475 £750
2011-12 £7,235 £7,475 £240
2012-13 £7,599 £8,105 £505
2013-14 £7,755 £9,440 £1,685
2014-15 £7,956 £10,000 £2,036
2015-16 £8,060 £10,600 £2,540

For 2015-16 there is therefore up to £ 304.80 payable by someone who has not reached the point where they are liable for Income Tax.

The limits and rates for the following tax year are normally announced at the same time as the Autumn Statement made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Current rates are shown on the hmrc.gov.uk website.

It doesn't look like it's been cut to me from that.

[ohsocynical]

As is already being pointed out by some:

Labour's plans don't actually require a rise in NI - but the Tory plans, if a VAT rise is ruled out, means either a significant tax hike elsewhere or even deeper cuts.

As usual, short term tactical lobby-wowing "brilliance" from Dave starts to unravel before the day is even out.

The PMQ lunchtime shift over at the Guardian were punching the air like Cameron had just scored the winner in the FA Cup rather than gotten a headline for a day whilst simultaneously hamstringing his own party's deficit reduction policy by ostensibly removing the one thing that could potentially mitigate it to something other than total fantasy.

Now they've got to go through the election campaign pretending they meant it when they said their plan comes entirely from cuts and none of the economists who looked at it after the Budget thought that was credible in the slightest.

If they'd intended to rule out VAT they'd have done it in the Budget when they had total media coverage for days, not in PMQs on a Wednesday. This is Dave's surprise (to his own ministers) announcement of just 4 energy tariffs all over again.

Hadn't thought about it, but thinking about how he looked and finally shouted yes after Ed pressed him I reckon we've seen another example of brain mouth disconnect.

[Spacedone]

As is already being pointed out by some:

Labour's plans don't actually require a rise in NI - but the Tory plans, if a VAT rise is ruled out, means either a significant tax hike elsewhere or even deeper cuts.

As usual, short term tactical lobby-wowing "brilliance" from Dave starts to unravel before the day is even out.

The PMQ lunchtime shift over at the Guardian were punching the air like Cameron had just scored the winner in the FA Cup rather than gotten a headline for a day whilst simultaneously hamstringing his own party's deficit reduction policy by ostensibly removing the one thing that could potentially mitigate it to something other than total fantasy.

Now they've got to go through the election campaign pretending they meant it when they said their plan comes entirely from cuts and none of the economists who looked at it after the Budget thought that was credible in the slightest.

If they'd intended to rule out VAT they'd have done it in the Budget when they had total media coverage for days, not in PMQs on a Wednesday. This is Dave's surprise (to his own ministers) announcement of just 4 energy tariffs all over again.

BBC quote Matthew Handjob saying:

Pushed on whether the Conservatives will explicitly rule out a rise in National Insurance contributions, he said: "We've been cutting National Insurance. We're very clear, we've been cutting it... the direction from us is clear." He says you don't cut it in one parliament and raise it in the next.

Mr Hancock also says his party knows where it is going to make the savings it needs to make - £12bn from welfare, £5bn from tackling tax avoidance and the rest in savings from government departments.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-32041435" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

NICs been cut since 2010 ? Really ??

I wouldn't sign an affidavit that they hadn't cut NICs but I very much doubt he was telling the truth.

Looking at this it doesn't appear that they have. It also appears that the rates went up 1% from 2010/11 (that might have been outgoing Labour policy though, haven't checked).

http://www.rossmartin.co.uk/tax-guides/ ... ance-rates" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

However didn't Osborne just announce that self-employed people are exempt from some types of NIC in the latest Budget? So technically true for about 1 month in the last 5 years but actually cobblers.

Wasn't there some story going around about removing under 25s from NI? Not sure if that actually happened.

[ScarletGas]

Camerons old Eton pal James Landale on the BBC 6 O'Clock news trying to convince us that PMQs today was the game changer.

He all but said the election was won by his pal today ignoring all the foot in mouth issues from the tories over the last few days.

Only surprise is that the fishpointer has not insisted Landale runs the debates rather than that old leftie Paxman.

[diGriz]

As is already being pointed out by some:

Labour's plans don't actually require a rise in NI - but the Tory plans, if a VAT rise is ruled out, means either a significant tax hike elsewhere or even deeper cuts.

As usual, short term tactical lobby-wowing "brilliance" from Dave starts to unravel before the day is even out.

The PMQ lunchtime shift over at the Guardian were punching the air like Cameron had just scored the winner in the FA Cup rather than gotten a headline for a day whilst simultaneously hamstringing his own party's deficit reduction policy by ostensibly removing the one thing that could potentially mitigate it to something other than total fantasy.

Now they've got to go through the election campaign pretending they meant it when they said their plan comes entirely from cuts and none of the economists who looked at it after the Budget thought that was credible in the slightest.

If they'd intended to rule out VAT they'd have done it in the Budget when they had total media coverage for days, not in PMQs on a Wednesday. This is Dave's surprise (to his own ministers) announcement of just 4 energy tariffs all over again.

Hadn't thought about it, but thinking about how he looked and finally shouted yes after Ed pressed him I reckon we've seen another example of brain mouth disconnect.

Or he has completely had enough and would bow out 6 months into another term, should the worst happen and they get in again After that his promises can be broken.

I get the feeling he'd rather go now.

[edit] I'm a bit tired, re-reading this I realise I'm suggesting he would keep his word... I don't expect that. Ever.

[diGriz]

Man Loses Job After Punching Colleague In Face

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/03 ... 40474.html

[pk1]

Ian King, Live (Sky)

After today's finance bill became law, the likely number of pages in the next Tolleys tax handbook.

In 2010/1 there were only 17,795 pages - so much for tax simplification !

[Spacedone]

Man Loses Job After Punching Colleague In Face

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/03 ... 40474.html

The question is when does man get arrest by plod for ABH? Do the laws of the land not apply to the rich and famous?

[PorFavor]

The PMQ lunchtime shift over at the Guardian were punching the air like Cameron had just scored the winner in the FA Cup rather than gotten a headline for a day whilst simultaneously hamstringing his own party's deficit reduction policy by ostensibly removing the one thing that could potentially mitigate it to something other than total fantasy.

Now they've got to go through the election campaign pretending they meant it when they said their plan comes entirely from cuts and none of the economists who looked at it after the Budget thought that was credible in the slightest.

If they'd intended to rule out VAT they'd have done it in the Budget when they had total media coverage for days, not in PMQs on a Wednesday. This is Dave's surprise (to his own ministers) announcement of just 4 energy tariffs all over again.

Hadn't thought about it, but thinking about how he looked and finally shouted yes after Ed pressed him I reckon we've seen another example of brain mouth disconnect.

Or he has completely had enough and would bow out 6 months into another term, should the worst happen and they get in again After that his promises can be broken.

I get the feeling he'd rather go now.

[edit] I'm a bit tired, re-reading this I realise I'm suggesting he would keep his word... I don't expect that. Ever.

I remember saying a long time ago (possibly as long ago as the Guardian) that I thought he could well flounce off but probably fortunately, in terms of his being the front-man for the Conservatives, he's stuck it for longer than I thought he might.

[Eric_WLothian]

Man Loses Job After Punching Colleague In Face

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/03 ... 40474.html

The question is when does man get arrest by plod for ABH? Do the laws of the land not apply to the rich and famous?

North Yorkshire police have asked to see the BBC's internal report, saying it will be "assessed appropriately and action will be taken... where necessary".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-32052736

edited to add:

Responding to the news, Prime Minister David Cameron said he believed that "if you do something wrong at work there can be consequences" and that "aggressive and abusive behaviour is not acceptable in the workplace".

Pot... kettle?

[diGriz]

Man Loses Job After Punching Colleague In Face

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/03 ... 40474.html

The question is when does man get arrest by plod for ABH? Do the laws of the land not apply to the rich and famous?

He's a well respected, well loved, successful presenter on the BBC, it's only right that people turn a blind eye to any iffy behaviour.

[citizenJA]

From RogerOThornhill in another place - an extract from today's PMQ's -

"...here's the exchange after Cameron asked the question about NI - and note that it is supposed to be questions to the PM and not by him:

Edward Miliband:
The Prime Minister will have plenty of time to ask questions after 7 May—and I am afraid to say that his own Office for Budget Responsibility has referred to

“a much sharper squeeze on real spending…than anything seen over the past five years”.

Next question, and this should be an easier one. Five years ago, the Prime Minister promised to cut net migration to tens of thousands. Straight answer to a straight question: is that a broken promise? Yes or no?

The Prime Minister:
Let me give the right hon. Gentleman a second chance. I answered a very simple question about VAT. I ruled out an increase. Let me ask the right hon. Gentleman again: will he rule out an increase in national insurance contributions?

We all know that this is Labour’s jobs tax. This is Labour’s tax of choice. This is what Labour clobbers working people, families and enterprises with. So let me ask the right hon. Gentleman again—straight question, straight answer—will he rule it out?

There you go.

A simple question about net migration...and no answer. Not even a vague reference to it.

Mainly because he, and everyone else knows the answer - yes, it was a broken promise.

Miliband didn't answer about NI because that's not what he is there to do.. It's in order for the leader of the opposition to ignore questions like that but not for the PM.

Thank God it's Cameron's last one - he's had good practice at asking questions when it comes to the first PMQs after the election though."

http://discussion.theguardian.com/comme ... k/49460896" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The party calling National Insurance (NI) a 'tax' is the Tory party. NI is called that name to remind us all we're contributing to our society supporting us. That came from a Labour government. Dave is bewildered & in his vain, spoiled impetuousness he projects his own party's failings, longings & policies onto Labour inappropriately. It's Dave's Tory party kicking working people & anyone else not a Tory.

We've witnessed Dave's bizarre mental breaks repeatedly. In times of strain, Dave has a disconcerting habit of disassociating himself from himself, he begins to talk about himself in the third person. For example, during the floods last year, Dave spoke of his position as Prime Minister as though someone else had that job, like the wizard in Oz. The choice exchange quoted above is a symptom of Dave's ability only to look the part, he's totally unable to actually do the job. It's going to be a sad biography, if it gets written.

[LadyCentauria]

For your pleasure:

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oh dear me! That is really bad – and not in a good way. I'll never get that minute back

[ohsocynical]

Natalie Rowe ‏@RealNatalieRowe 29 mins29 minutes ago

Osborne laughing his tits off (they used to be bigger) today at #PMQs can't wait for my book to be out , wipe the smile of his idiotic face!

Ow, ow, ow.

[diGriz]

For your pleasure:

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oh dear me! That is really bad – and not in a good way. I'll never get that minute back

You managed a whole minute?

[ohsocynical]

Hadn't thought about it, but thinking about how he looked and finally shouted yes after Ed pressed him I reckon we've seen another example of brain mouth disconnect.

Or he has completely had enough and would bow out 6 months into another term, should the worst happen and they get in again After that his promises can be broken.

I get the feeling he'd rather go now.

[edit] I'm a bit tired, re-reading this I realise I'm suggesting he would keep his word... I don't expect that. Ever.

I remember saying a long time ago (possibly as long ago as the Guardian) that I thought he could well flounce off but probably fortunately, in terms of his being the front-man for the Conservatives, he's stuck it for longer than I thought he might.

And don't forget that arrogance. When asked why he wanted to be PM, the famous 'I think I'll be rather good at it' or words to that effect.

[PorFavor]

I'm sitting here impatiently waiting for a report-back from ephemerid.

Edited for bold. Perhaps I should just steer clear of the "b"s. I certainly won't be attempting any bullet points.

[citizenJA]

Oh, holy sh**

Police continued spying on Labour activists after their election as MPs
Ex-minister Peter Hain says whistleblower’s disclosure of spying operations during 1990s raises questions about parliamentary sovereignty

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015 ... stleblower" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Police conducted spying operations on a string of Labour politicians during the 1990s, covertly monitoring them even after they had been elected to the House of Commons, a whistleblower has revealed.

Peter Francis, a former undercover police officer, said he read secret files on 10 MPs during his 11 years working for the Metropolitan police’s special branch.

Francis approached [Peter] Hain [Labour MP for Neath] and described how he had read the pink special branch files – known as personal registry files – on the MPs while he was working for the police. He said some of the information in the files dated from the subjects’ days as political campaigners before they entered parliament, but special branch continued to store details of their political activities after they were elected to the Commons. “When you become an MP, the files don’t stop,” he said.

Francis said: “My question is: how can people help formulate this public inquiry if they didn’t actually know they were spied upon? By me revealing that these MPs were also spied upon the same as many trade union members, countless law-abiding political activists and demonstrators also were, they can all demand to be included in the inquiry.”

[Spacedone]

Kevin Maguire ‏@Kevin_Maguire 45m45 minutes ago
Labour MPs tonight put on 3-line whip tomorrow to fight Dump Bercow plot by Cons via secret Speaker election in May instead of open as now

This tweet doesn't really make much sense but I take it was the Tories are trying to quietly force Bercow out?

[LadyCentauria]

...bacon's on, smoked variety today for a change.

Oak or applewood?

Good morning.

Oak this time. Fresh crusty white bread too.

Any left? I'm a bit stuck for what to have for supper and can't do proper cooking today – I've gone all droppy, again.

[Spacedone]

Tories and Labour have boxed themselves in on taxation, claims IFS
Pre-election pledges not to introduce major increases in VAT, national insurance and income tax after the election could cause problems if economy slows down

http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... claims-ifs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

David Cameron and Ed Miliband have “boxed” themselves in on taxation after a bidding war led Labour and the Tories to rule out major increases in Britain’s three main taxes that raise 60% of revenues, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has warned.

The IFS said that in the event of an economic downturn, Labour and the Tories would find themselves with little room for manoeuvre in the next parliament, after the most significant announcements on tax of the election by the two main parties.

It's a much smaller box for Labour but I don't think anyone really expects these pledges to be stuck to regardless of circumstances. If we go back into recession then policies will obviously change.

Miliband’s failure to answer the prime minister’s challenge on national insurance suggested that Labour had been trying to keep its options open. Balls said he had made clear in recent days that he had no plans to raise this as he said the prime minister’s VAT pledge was not believable.

Nick Watts talking bollocks again. There was no failure to answer. It was PMQs!

[pk1]

Nick Watts talking bollocks again. There was no failure to answer. It was PMQs!

Chris Leslie at yesterday's DP also said there were no plans for an increase in NICs but nothing will stop Watt spouting shite, sadly.

[utopiandreams]

I watched Sajid Javid on Channel 4 News with increasing incredulity and nearly choked on my tea when he claimed that this government had delivered £20bn savings to the welfare bill, as incredulous as the extra £100bn tax revenues that IDS recently claimed. I haven't been keeping a record but ephemerid may well be able to tell us otherwise. Even so when Tories make such statements they're particularly hard to challenge.

Osborne's definition of welfare as evidenced by HMRC is not quite what the rest of us imagine. Even with all the sanctions, illness and disability denials plus the complete disappearance of many thousands from the records, the benefit bill has not been reduced. So what exactly is this £20bn reduction in the welfare bill? Perhaps it's something like the £12.7bn extra this government has put into the NHS, temporarily rising too £13bn one PMQs and back again since, despite numerous statements of further amounts to deal with immediate or pending crises. My head is spinning.

Anyway we now have a choice between competence and chaos, which got me thinking about what competences exactly? So many things rushed through my head of the last five years that it's almost impossible to get a handle on them. Nevertheless over the next few days or possibly week I intend to compile a catalogue of errors or a measure of incompetence as delivered by this government. ohsocynical may already have one for all I know.

Edit: inserted a comma.

[utopiandreams]

Mmm, I'm not sure whether I should post this, especially as I usually respect the privacy of others. Neither is it political, but there are some things that just rile. I flicked through the channel listings before turning the telly off and noticed which Grand Designs programme was on. What riles me about it is that the local residents clubbed together and raised a substantial amount for the couple after their cottage burned down with lapsed insurance. They hadn't even been in the area long.

I don't know about anybody else but I'd have thought that made good telly. Yet for some reason it is never mentioned.

Edit; just to clarify, it's the lack of mention that riles, not the rest. I should add that this is my own view and not once have I heard any such feelings expressed by said residents. I fell the post can stand since they'd already had publicity from the programme.

[ErnstRemarx]

As is already being pointed out by some:

Labour's plans don't actually require a rise in NI - but the Tory plans, if a VAT rise is ruled out, means either a significant tax hike elsewhere or even deeper cuts.

As usual, short term tactical lobby-wowing "brilliance" from Dave starts to unravel before the day is even out.

The PMQ lunchtime shift over at the Guardian were punching the air like Cameron had just scored the winner in the FA Cup rather than gotten a headline for a day whilst simultaneously hamstringing his own party's deficit reduction policy by ostensibly removing the one thing that could potentially mitigate it to something other than total fantasy.

Now they've got to go through the election campaign pretending they meant it when they said their plan comes entirely from cuts and none of the economists who looked at it after the Budget thought that was credible in the slightest.

If they'd intended to rule out VAT they'd have done it in the Budget when they had total media coverage for days, not in PMQs on a Wednesday. This is Dave's surprise (to his own ministers) announcement of just 4 energy tariffs all over again.

This presumes, of course, that CMD wasn't simply lying about a rise in VAT. He needs to get himself a majority and if it means a few porkies on the way, well, the British people really like him and are willing to put up with a bit more hardship so the long term economic plan can be brought to fruition**

Reasonable isn't it?

** the fruition of said plan is the next major recession via a housing crash and rampant deflation, due in the next 18 months I'd say. But at least Dave won't be harmed by it, and that's the important thing.

[ErnstRemarx]

Oak or applewood?

Good morning.

Oak this time. Fresh crusty white bread too.

Any left? I'm a bit stuck for what to have for supper and can't do proper cooking today – I've gone all droppy, again.

Marmoset pate, or, if you're feeling unadventurous, cheese flavoured ice cream.

[PorFavor]

Goodnight, everyone.

[diGriz]

I quite like Bercow. The only tory I think I've respected. He's done his job well.

[citizenJA]

Goodnight, everyone.

goodnight PF

[frightful_oik]

I quite like Bercow. The only tory I think I've respected. He's done his job well.

I don't mind Rory Stuart (sp?).

[ohsocynical]

I watched Sajid Javid on Channel 4 News with increasing incredulity and nearly choked on my tea when he claimed that this government had delivered £20bn savings to the welfare bill, as incredulous as the extra £100bn tax revenues that IDS recently claimed. I haven't been keeping a record but ephemerid may well be able to tell us otherwise. Even so when Tories make such statements they're particularly hard to challenge.

Osborne's definition of welfare as evidenced by HMRC is not quite what the rest of us imagine. Even with all the sanctions, illness and disability denials plus the complete disappearance of many thousands from the records, the benefit bill has not been reduced. So what exactly is this £20bn reduction in the welfare bill? Perhaps it's something like the £12.7bn extra this government has put into the NHS, temporarily rising too £13bn one PMQs and back again since, despite numerous statements of further amounts to deal with immediate or pending crises. My head is spinning.

Anyway we now have a choice between competence and chaos, which got me thinking about what competences exactly? So many things rushed through my head of the last five years that it's almost impossible to get a handle on them. Nevertheless over the next few days or possibly week I intend to compile a catalogue of errors or a measure of incompetence as delivered by this government. ohsocynical may already have one for all I know.

Edit: inserted a comma.

I used to have extensive lists of all the cock-ups, lies, fiddles, and ineptness by name from day 1 of the government, but lost them when my computer crashed. Also had masses of links to older news stories.
I had posted quite a lot of it on the old FTN site but it was in regular daily posts, not the special boards so no chance of rescue when we transferred here I'm afraid. I did retrieve what Labour achieved during the Blair regime but that was all.

I used Google archives for some of it. Dave's disaster list was huge.

Here's a few I remember.
Soon after he got in, Dave was using tax payers money for a personal photographer. Big outcry, and he dropped him, but we are still paying for Sam's hairdresser, and he switched to a military photographer so really we're still paying for it.
Then there was Coulson, Rebecca, Reisa? the horse, LOL, Murdoch, Hunt hiding behind a tree.
I seem to remember in his early days he was stopped from cocking up diplomatically a few times [China was one country?]
When a vote was going through to do with the Leveson Enquiry in the early hours, Dave was at home asleep.
He said we [meaning] the workers, would be in permanent austerity in his Lord Mayors banquet speech. I think that was the one where he was pictured full to the gills with his shirt front undone and bulging.
The floods: he said money was no object there was plenty. The minister for Environment wasn't there at the start of the emergency.
He and Clegg promised nursery places and within 24 hours the treasury said they hadn't costed it yet.
There are his election promises all broken - dozens of those. There are a few websites where they're listed in detail.

Hope that helps...

[ohsocynical]

Goodnight, everyone.

Night PF

[utopiandreams]

...

Here's a few I remember.
Soon after he got in, Dave was using tax payers money for a personal photographer. Big outcry, and he dropped him...

Thanks for the list which I shall copy for starters. Funnily enough we both initially though of the very same thing, shown above. What I intend to do is compile such list with links to corroborating articles. It may possibly just be a list of headlines with links. Dunno yet. However it works out I'll post it here and in the other place. If I feel really bold and it's worthy I may even contact Channel 4 too. Their news department appears to think as we, so some of the links may be in their direction.

[utopiandreams]

I don't mind Rory Stuart (sp?).

I really like him too, frightful_oik, though I've only ever heard him speak of troublespots or defence matters. Not that I approve of nukes though. 'And it's Stewart btw.

[adam]

Some 25 years ago now, in 1990, a young Grant Shapps hired me as the sole employee of his profitable live bait vending business, House of Maggots, which I didn’t over firmly deny in the Observer last March. Grant Shapps and I spent many a moonlit night at popular Suffolk angling spots filling roadside fridges with comatose larvae, discarding maggots that failed to thrive, talking about our dreams. But who was the Grant Shapps that I imagined I knew all those years ago?

If Grant Shapps was made by little green aliens, what’s left?
If Michael Green doesn’t exist, can we be sure that the Tory party chair is who he says he is?

- Stewart Lee
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... tewart-lee" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I leaned against the outside wall of a public toilet near a building site on the banks of the Tay and rang a mobile number Grant Shapps had given me 25 years ago...Grant Shapps, identifiably and audibly Grant Shapps, snapped “Who gave you this number?” Instead of asking for Grant Shapps, I said: “Is Michael Green there?” “Michael Green is here,” came the reply, “but who and where, I wonder, do you imagine you are, my meddling maggot?”

I particularly liked the beginning of the article, before he got onto Shapps

Last week, I betrayed the homosexual parenting community. At Elton John’s insistence I tried to boycott Dolce & Gabbana, which was a great sacrifice for me, as other designer underwear makes my testicles look old.

[ohsocynical]

@UtopianDream

I expect you remember these.

Lord Freud called us 'stock'.
IDS said to put our kids in second hand clothes.
Not forgetting Plebgate.
We had the horse meat scandal which was never resolved.

[frightful_oik]

I don't mind Rory Stuart (sp?).

I really like him too, frightful_oik, though I've only ever heard him speak of troublespots or defence matters. Not that I approve of nukes though. 'And it's Stewart btw.

Ah, I wasn't sure; hence the 'sp?'.

[utopiandreams]

@UtopianDream

I expect you remember these.

Lord Freud called us 'stock'.
IDS said to put our kids in second hand clothes.
Not forgetting Plebgate.
We had the horse meat scandal which was never resolved.

Thanks again and indeed you've come up with one I didn't even know, namely IDS telling people how to clothe their kids. I suppose I should compile and post current suggestions before the list is complete so that others may add to them too. It shall be quite pleasing to furnish it with references. I have no doubt that Tories shall be upping the volume before the election and now more than ever they need to be challenged. Labour may not want a dirty campaign but I have absolutely no compunction in highlighting past events. We only have six weeks to go.

[frightful_oik]

Have we had this?

Survation poll for the Daily Mirror out today. Their topline figures were CON 32%, LAB 33%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 18%, GRN 4%

from UKPR.

[diGriz]

Is it a bit fishy that the Bercow ousting tomorrow also falls on the day that Miliband and Cameron are doing the Sky News interviews?

[ohsocynical]

@UtopianDream
From May 2010.

Oh my God. There is so much. Perhaps if we started a board especially for these links?

2010. Muslims must embrace our British values, David Cameron says
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... -says.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Full transcript | David Cameron | Speech on radicalisation and Islamic extremism | Munich | 5 February 2011
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-s ... m-ideology" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

David Cameron Pretending to be Common
http://davidcameronpretendingtobecommon.tumblr.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

DAVID CAMERON’S CONTRACT WITH YOU
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/files ... spaper.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

David Cameron sparks fury from critics who say attack on multiculturalism has boosted English Defence League
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... icised-edl" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

David Cameron U-turn denies Britain EU referendum
BRITONS have been robbed of the chance to vote on a power grab by Brussels despite promises of a referendum.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/208589 ... referendum" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

David Cameron, Leader of the Conservative Party, speaking at a rally in Bristol
http://www.totalpolitics.com/print/spee ... stol.thtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;,

[Spacedone]

Is it a bit fishy that the Bercow ousting tomorrow also falls on the day that Miliband and Cameron are doing the Sky News interviews?

OldNat on UKPR made the following points that I thought was interesting

If Bercow is dumped as Speaker before Monday, does he have to seek nomination as a Tory? candidate to hope to be re-elected?

Presumably, the other Westminster parties would put up candidates against him, if the local Tory party did select him?

With no Speaker in place when the UK HoC resumes, presumably the first action has to be to appoint one – taking one off another party’s tally.

Are the Tories being a bit devious in forcing Bercow to fight an election without any preparation or canvassing (or hoping his constituency party won't select him)? Or are they being a bit devious in trying to come up with a way to reduce the number of Labour MPs at a time when every one may be needed?

[NonOxCol]

Good evening.

Well, it's been more than 24 hours and I still haven't simmered down about "Eleven minutes with Cameron and Landale on publicly-funded television news", and its dismal sequels, "Gloss over the Age UK heckling" and "Half a minute on Afzal Amin running straight into some tough talk from Theresa May".

But hey, perhaps I've been getting too wound up and I should just relax. After all, Landale knows best. He's an Old Etonian who can ask another Old Etonian whether "being posh has held you back", and in the same segment casually discuss whether a third Old Etonian might replace the second one day. And then, shortly afterwards, he can tell all us plebs that "sharing a school is irrelevant".

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

From national treasure to national disgrace in a few short years. I hope someone writes a book one day. But preferably not an Old Etonian, a former chair of the Young Conservatives, a former Thatcherite newspaper editor, a former member of the Bullingdon Club, a man censured for biased welfare coverage or a man asked by the Prime Minister to run as a Tory Mayoral candidate.

[Spacedone]

YouGov/Sun poll tonight – Labour lead by one:

CON 34%,
LAB 35%,
LD 8%,
UKIP 12%,
GRN 6%